Worksheet Comments

I looked over the worksheets that everyone handed in on Tuesday.  Below I have made comments about points some of you either left blank,seemed to misunderstand, or asked about in class.  I hope that these comments will help clarify what kind of information needs to be incorporated into your Critical Analysis Paper (for which you completed this worksheet).

PLEASE USE THIS PAGE TO CLARIFY ISSUES YOU MIGHT HAVE HAD WHEN COMPLETING THE WORKSHEET.  IF YOU STILL HAVE QUESTIONS, DO NOT HESITATE (OR WAIT) TO CONTACT ME.


The two biggest mistakes a person can make when writing this (or any) critical analysis:

  1. Not using specific examples from your chosen text as evidence to illustrate your claims.
  2. Not using, or citing, credible sources to support your claims.
THESIS - Should be more than a simple statement that the media example illustrates your myth.  You can use Galician's sample (p. 228; p. 232) as a model of how to write a thesis that is specific to the media example you chose.  However, your thesis does not have to be as specific to your example as Galician's sample seems to be.  You can think of your thesis as more general, for which your chosen media example is an illustration.  For a couple of examples of  a "thesis" that is more general, click here (or look at the bottom of this web page).
Step 1
Step 2
Step 3: DECONSTRUCTION 
  • EVIDENCE FOR LINKING MYTHS/STEREOTYPES; SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF CONTENT (MESSAGE) AND FORM (MEDIUM) THAT REPRESENT EMBEDDED VALUES - This is where you want to point out how your myth (and related myths) are demonstrated by using specific pieces of evidence from your media example.  For the most part, his is what you did (or will do) when presenting your media example in class.  Specific examples of "content" might include dialogue expressing the myth in a movie, or images in a magazine that reinforce the myth (etc.).  Specific examples of "form" involve the use of narrative media techniques (Galician Ch. 4, style, special effects, subtext, stereotypes, simplification, etc.) to convey meaning that reinforces the myth.
  • CITED COMMENTARY/RESEARCH - If you used any outside sources to find out more about the media example you chose, mention it here.  For example, did you listen to director's commentary on a DVD?  Did you read reviews of a book (movie, etc.) on-line or in a database?  This is ALSO where you would cite any other research used, such as information from Galician's textbook about myths (Ch. 2, chapter for your myth) and media narrative techniques (Ch. 4), class lectures about stereotypes, or your annotated bibliography sources.
Step 4: DIAGNOSIS 
  • MEANINGS AND POSSIBLE INTERPRETATIONS - Need to describe BOTH preferred and oppositional readings here.  Remember that opppositional readings will explain, using evidence from your media example, how the preferred reading is generally harmful.  Use narrative media techniques (Galician Ch. 4) to explain why people will be influenced to interpret your media example in a specific way (i.e., to have preferred reading of text).  It may be important to mention mass media theories (Galician Ch. 5 and class lecture) to explain why different people will interpret the messages in your media example differently (i.e., why would some people have an oppositional reading of the text, while most would have preferred reading).
    • Preferred and oppositional refers to the ways a person can "read" media "texts," as described on pp. 105-106.  Please look over that section. 
    • Essentially, the preferred interpretation is what the media wants you to take away from their message (I should buy these clothes because they will make me irresistible/sexy).  The oppositional reading looks at the negative, underlying meaning a critical reader might see (the clothing manufacturer is trying to get me to buy their overpriced product by making me feel insecure that no one will be attracted to me if I don't wear their slutty outfits).
  • COMPARISON WITH RATIONAL MODELS - Compare your chosen media portrayal to models for healthy relationships (discussed in textbook, Ch. 3, in class lecture, and in sources you found for your annotated bibliography);  which models or other relational communication theories best relate to your particular media example?
    • Rational models are the focus of Ch3 -- "rational" is used to mean realistic and does relate to the prescription, or any healthier alternative that you might have discovered in your research.
  • POSSIBLE EFFECTS - Be sure to consider all three kinds of effects possible--cognitive (change thinking, opinion), affective (influence emotions), and behavioral (persuaded to engage in some action)
  • EXPERT CITATIONS - Make sure to cite any research used to support your claims for this section.  This includes citing (as they are applicable) Galician, class lectures, and sources from your annotated bibliography.
  • [GENERAL COMMENT] - When trying to relate Galician's steps to her worksheet, don't get caught up in trying to make one match the other exactly.  Answer her questions as she poses them in Ch6, and you will have the foundation for a pretty good critical analysis.  If you look at Step 4 on the worksheet, for example, all Galician is really asking is for you to tell us what messages your media example is sending to audiences, and if and how those messages might be harmful, using research citations to back up your claims.  I'll try to tie Step 4 in Ch 6 and Step 4 on the worksheet together. 
    • You should notice that the different parts Galician break outs basically ask you to describe what message the media example is sending [preferred interp] and what other kinds of (usually more negative) messages could be perceived [oppositional interp]. 
    • Mass media theories might explain how different people would be effected differently by the media example, resulting in some only absorbing the preferred message while others might see the "other," oppositional messages. 
    • Since the preferred message meaning typically reflects one of the media myths (or other negative meaning) it will probably not compare favorably with the rational models, reflecting perhaps only a part of "good" model for relationships [comparison with rational models].  Is there anything good, or "rational" about the media example?  What is missing/distorted/misleading that makes it a "bad" model for relationships?
    • If the media example is not a good model for relationships, it will have some potentially harmful aspects [possible effects], perhaps causing people to change their behavior (e.g. buy something), change their thinking (e.g., believe that men should be in charge in a relationship), and/or change their emotions (e.g. become depressed because you'll never be thin enough). 
    • You should back up your claims with research [expert citations] which might include explanations of how mass media theories would explain how audiences might process the messages --Come to a conclusion [judgment/evaluation] about the media example (e.g. this message is harmful).
Step 5: DESIGN 
  • RELATED THEORIES AND RATIONAL MODELS - if you were going to recreate your media example to represent a healthier approach to relationships, what research would you use to base your new creation?  Start with Galician's prescription for your myth, but also consider using rational models discussed in Ch. 3, relational communication theories discussed in class lecture, and other sources your found for your annotated bibliography. 
    • Step 5, "related theories and rational models," is where you identify any research related to the healthier alternatives that you could incorporate into your reconstruction.
  • LIKELIHOOD OF USE - I know that Galician's example on p. 229 says "slim to none" (which is what most of you also stated in your worksheets), but you should consider and discuss WHY your alternative reconstruction is unlikely to used in the media.
  • EXISTING RECONSTRUCTION - If you recall ever seeing a media example in real life that promotes a healthier alternative to your myth than what is portrayed in your current example, list/describe it here.  This is NOT where you would describe an alternative reconstruction of the current example that you have developed.  If you can't think of any existing reconstructions, that is okay.
Step 6
Step 7: DISSEMINATION 
  • ADVOCACY ACTION PLAN - don't forget to look over the "resistive tactics" discussed in class (also listed in Ch. 6 footnote on p. 110) to help you figure out the large variety of ways you could take action
  • TIMETABLE OF SPECIFIC ACTIVITIES (PERSONAL/PUBLIC/PROFESSIONAL) - "Personal" refers to how your life will be changed by new understanding resulting from your analysis of your media example; "Public" refers to how you will share what you have learned with others, including friends, family, classmates, in other classes, etc.; "Professional" is likely not to apply to many of you, but for those of you who might be thinking about careers in media or other professions where media would be utilized, how will you use your new knowledge to promote healthier messages about relationships? (Please be realistic--I understand that most of you will not teach a course about media myths, or present your research at a conference)

 

ADDITIONAL EXAMPLES OF A THESIS 

My Thesis for Myth #8 (Conflict Content Analysis I conducted and mentioned in class) - As viewers watch sitcom couples engage in conflict, it would seem easy to dismiss the argument that sitcoms, given their frivolous nature, can influence viewers' expectations of romantic relationships. However, one cannot ignore the powerful draw that humor has over large numbers of television viewers or the subtly persuasive effects of humor on memory.  To determine whether dysfunctional conflict behaviors are presented as normal in successful romantic relationships, we examine how modern television sitcoms perpetuate myths regarding mindreading (Myth #3), partner transformation (Myth #7), and, most important of all, the belief that conflict is key to loving romantic relationships (Myth #8). 
Merskin's Thesis (from an article titled "Reviving Lolita") - The message from advertisers and the mass media to girls (as eventual women) is they should always be sexually available, always have sex on their minds, be willing to be dominated and even sexually aggressed against, and they will be gazed on as sexual objects. The increasing sexualization of children, in particular girls, in fashion advertising is a disturbing phenomenon (Kilbourne, 1999a). To examine this inclination, I apply Galician's (2004) seven-step media literacy analysis framework to illustrative magazine fashion advertisements. My central concern is fetishization of young girls' innocence and their vulnerability to physical and emotional violence as possible outcomes of sexualized representations in the media (Kincaid, 1998). Images cannot say "no." Just as "eroticized gazes at the child-woman" are everywhere (Walkerdine, 1997, p. 166), so too are sexualized portrayals of women as child like. In the media in general and fashion advertising in particular,the "merchandising of children as sexual commodities is ubiquitous and big business" (Rich, 1997, p. 23). Accumulation theory (DeFleur & Dennis, 1994) predicts that if messages are seen and heard consistently across media forms, corroborated between those forms, and persistently presented, they will have long-term, powerful effects on audiences. Hence, the accumulation process normalizes looking at images of and thinking about preadolescent and adolescent girls and adult women as sexually available.